Family law bills at odds in Illinois House

Sunday

Mar 30, 2014 at 4:45 PM

TOBIAS WALLof Gatehouse Media Illinois

SPRINGFIELD — State lawmakers have a choice this spring between a wide-reaching overhaul of Illinois’ divorce law or a bill with the single aim of setting a minimum amount of parenting time for non-custodial parents.

One bill is a 196-page omnibus that changes dozens of provisions currently on the books. The other, more narrow bill, sets minimum parenting time standards for divorced parents.

Both bills are in amendment stage on the House floor, but it’s uncertain when they’ll move.

Rep. Kelly Burke, D-Evergreen Park, sponsored the omnibus that she said was drafted based on recommendations made by the Family Law Study Committee, created by a House joint resolution in 2008.

On the committee were legislators, attorneys and family advocacy group members.

“The committee was created to revamp the divorce act. They felt it was ready for an overhaul,” Burke said.

Equal time?

One area the committee agreed needed attention was how judges make custody and visitation decisions. Currently, the most typical court-ordered arrangement allows non-custodial parents every other weekend and one day each week with their kids.

An original version of Burke’s House Bill 1452 was drafted to include the committee’s recommendation stating equal parenting time between divorced parents was in a child’s best interest.

According to that draft, if parents are not able to come up with their own parenting plan, the courts step in.

“The committee put (a minimum parenting time provision) in the original legislation as a presumption, and that presumption could be rebutted by different circumstances,” Burke said.

According to the original language, judges were to presume that allotting non-custodial parents at least 35 percent of parenting time in a week, or almost 60 hours, was in a child’s best interest.

The 60-hour provision wasn’t binding, but some parents’ rights groups involved with drafting the legislation said it was an improvement over current law they could live with.

But an amendment added to the bill changed much of the original language, including the 60-hour provision, and moved the provision to the “aspirational” section of the draft, effectively meaning that the provision is something to aspire to but not necessarily enforce.

The amended language acknowledges that a child’s best interest might be served with a minimum of 60 hours of parenting time each week for non-custodial parents, but the provision should not cause a judge to deviate from normal procedure when making rulings.

That caught the attention of groups like Illinois Fathers and Fathers’ Rights, which claim the original language was scrapped and replaced without the consent of some of the committee members.

Child protection

Shane Jones, spokesman for Fathers Rights, said the change made to the language was a departure from the committee’s original intent.

“We actually supported (Burke’s omnibus) before,” Illinois Fathers president Steven Westerfield said. He said the amendment “was absolutely what triggered” efforts to change the law without Burke’s help.

Cabello’s bill takes language in Burke’s first draft a step further, making the 60-hour provision a mandate. Supporters say that will cut down on custody battles in which some parents do anything they can — including lie about their ex in court—to convince a judge to award them full custody of a child.

“Having been a cop for 20 years, you see a lot of how people treat each other once they start going their separate ways,” Cabello said. “The goal is to try to make sure that the children are the ones that are protected, that the children have both parents in their lives.”

“Her (Burke’s) bill has been stalled for quite some time. If nothing else, hopefully it gets them to move a little bit quicker,” he said.

Judicial discretion

Opponents of Cabello’s bill say judges shouldn’t be forced to follow a “one-size-fits-all” approach that doesn’t account for individual cases.

Burke said judges need discretion so they can craft the best parenting plan possible.

“I think the whole topic comes out of frustration, mostly in men. Courts are reluctant to give them the amount of custody they want,” Burke said. “There are parents who feel their situation wasn’t duly considered. I totally get the frustration. Everybody understands there is an issue with this.”

And that’s why the committee made parenting-time recommendations, Westerfield said.

“The FLSC worked hard for many years, taking in witnesses, research and data,” he said. “These are the recommendations of a star-studded cast of lawyers, judges, legislators and experts selected by the Illinois House of Representatives. These are not the recommendations of a bunch of disgruntled dads.”

He, like Jones, said Burke’s amended bill no longer reflects the committee’s work.

Both bills are in amendment stage in the House, but Burke said she’d bring hers back to the House Judiciary Committee with another amendment.

Cabello said he’d “be willing to hold (his bill) if Rep. Burke’s bill is going to be coming out soon.”

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.